Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Do you have any knowledge of the Bible at all? What a ridiculously ignorant statement to make!
Can humans ever know better than the one who created them?
All of God's intelligent creatures have free will. They were not created to be robots with only a "yes Master" code embedded.
As free moral agents, all of us have choices that we value every day. To be made in God's image and likeness, we can reflect the moral qualities of the Creator himself....like wisdom, justice, the appropriate exercise of power....and his dominant quality....love.
Can any of us force someone to love us? Can we legally obligate someone to have affection for us? Can we use fear to intimidate someone to love us? If not...why not?
In order to have the freedom to love and obey God, we conversely also have to have the freedom to hate and disobey him. He allows us that choice...would you prefer that he didn't? Do you value that freedom?
The only reason why humans and angels are presently in this situation is because free will is a precious possession....but abusing it makes life miserable for all. Was it a mistake to allow us this freedom? Or was there a way to allow both humans and angels to see and experience for themselves the folly of abusing it?
This object lesson that began in Eden was all about consequences. Using free will in an abusive way was never going to accomplish anything good. God knew it and he even tried to protect the humans by instituting a single command that would have saved us all this angst and suffering....but a rebel spirit cooked up a scheme to derail God's original purpose. He abused his free will so as to exercise his will over the humans and at the same time influence other free willed creatures in heaven. The humans fell for the plot and then, under the influence of their newly chosen "god" they began to use their own free will to subjugate others....and the rest, as they say, is history.
By allowing free will to be expressed and the full consequences of its abuse to be felt in every corner of the world without his intervention, God has set precedents for all time to come. Irresponsible use of free will always results in corruption and unacceptable outcomes. God's wisdom in how he handled all of this will be vindicated. Action speak louder than words and experience is the best teacher.
Humans were designed to be ruled by their Creator, who would always have their best interests at heart.....but they chose to reject his rulership in favour of ruling themselves....imagining that they know better than God. Having power over others always results in corruption, as we are well aware. Enough time has elapsed to allow humans to try every form of government that they could think up....all have ended in abject failure.
For God, teaching his children powerful lessons that will carry over into eternity means that these issues can never be raised again. No one will be able to challenge God's sovereign right to set reasonable limits for his 'children' for all time to come. The future will therefore be awesome!.....free from that abuse.
The end will forever justify the means.
...another completely ignorant statement!
Oh please
What was the Biblical slavery that was was established in Israel and had laws governing it?
Can you comprehend the times and the circumstances of these people's lives?
“Slavery” in Israel was not like the oppressive slavery known in more recent times. It was actually a way of protecting the family who, through financial reverses or calamity, were obliged to sell their land inheritance and who eventually used up the money received from the sale and were destitute. Or, they might get heavily into debt. Then, instead of being self-employed as they had been, the family, or certain members thereof, could go into “slavery.” But this slavery was very much like our modern-day principle of employment, working for another person, which for many is a form of ‘economic slavery.’
For example, the Hebrew “slave” had to be treated, not like property, but as a “hired laborer.” Furthermore, he was to be released after six years’ servitude. (Leviticus 25:39-43) At his release his master or “employer” had to give him material things, as he was able, to help the man and his family to make a fresh start. (Deuteronomy 15:12-15) By this arrangement a family could avoid being destitute and could have food and clothing until such time as they could stand on their own.
Moreover, the person, while in “slavery,” could engage in projects or other business or investments, so that in some cases a man was able to buy himself out of servitude. Or a near relative could pay off any indebtedness he might have, thereby releasing the man as a free person. (Leviticus 25:47-54) A daughter who went into “slavery” often was taken as the wife of her master. She had to be given full dues as was the case with any wife.—Exodus 21:7-11."
A Pattern of Things to Come — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY
"Slaves" in Israel were no more "slaves" than employees are in today's world.....all who work for a boss are slaves. Working conditions are largely a matter of geography and government policy.
The cruel slavery that Israel underwent in Egypt was not the kind they experienced later. Why would God release them from one form of harsh treatment, only to inflict the same situation on them again later?
For goodness sake, do some research!
Oh please
What was the Biblical slavery that was was established in Israel and had laws governing it?
Can you comprehend the times and the circumstances of these people's lives?
“Slavery” in Israel was not like the oppressive slavery known in more recent times. It was actually a way of protecting the family who, through financial reverses or calamity, were obliged to sell their land inheritance and who eventually used up the money received from the sale and were destitute. Or, they might get heavily into debt. Then, instead of being self-employed as they had been, the family, or certain members thereof, could go into “slavery.” But this slavery was very much like our modern-day principle of employment, working for another person, which for many is a form of ‘economic slavery.’
For example, the Hebrew “slave” had to be treated, not like property, but as a “hired laborer.” Furthermore, he was to be released after six years’ servitude. (Leviticus 25:39-43) At his release his master or “employer” had to give him material things, as he was able, to help the man and his family to make a fresh start. (Deuteronomy 15:12-15) By this arrangement a family could avoid being destitute and could have food and clothing until such time as they could stand on their own.
Moreover, the person, while in “slavery,” could engage in projects or other business or investments, so that in some cases a man was able to buy himself out of servitude. Or a near relative could pay off any indebtedness he might have, thereby releasing the man as a free person. (Leviticus 25:47-54) A daughter who went into “slavery” often was taken as the wife of her master. She had to be given full dues as was the case with any wife.—Exodus 21:7-11."
A Pattern of Things to Come — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY
"Slaves" in Israel were no more "slaves" than employees are in today's world.....all who work for a boss are slaves. Working conditions are largely a matter of geography and government policy.
The cruel slavery that Israel underwent in Egypt was not the kind they experienced later. Why would God release them from one form of harsh treatment, only to inflict the same situation on them again later?
For goodness sake, do some research!
I asked...."Can humans ever know better than the one who created them?"
You replied...."Apparently so, since in the bible God explicitly condones slavery; yet human beings today have concluded that owning others as property is horribly immoral."
I asked "Can you comprehend the times and the circumstances of these people's lives?"
You seem to want to put today's standards on ancient times and practices. Today slavery is considered immoral,
but back then it was common practice. In Israel, a slave's rights were protected under the law.
It was normal practice even to beat an errant son.
Again, remembering the times Solomon wrote...
"Do not hold back discipline from a boy.
If you strike him with the rod, he will not die.
14 With the rod you should strike him,
In order to save him from the Grave." (Proverbs 23:13-14)
So beating your son was considered good parenting. If you remember back in the old days it wasn't unusual for a son to get a good whooping behind the wood shed. It was called discipline and nobody turned a hair. The school system dished out discipline this way too. It seems a bit harsh these days but back then it was considered normal.
"The one holding back his rod is hating his son, but the one loving him is he
that does look for him with discipline.” (Prov. 13:24)
"And you have entirely forgotten the exhortation that addresses you as sons: “My son, do not belittle the discipline from Jehovah, nor give up when you are corrected by him; 6 for those whom Jehovah loves he disciplines, in fact, he scourges everyone whom he receives as a son.” (Hebrews 12:5-6; Proverbs 3:11-12)
Its a shame really that people are afraid to discipline their children....it has not produced respectful youths or a peaceful environment. Kids do horrible things to each other and film it to put it on social media.
No one is advocating a beating.....but a smack on the behind never hurt anyone.
Pain is something we want to avoid, so if discipline hurts it teaches us something....like the law of gravity, if we defy it, the consequences will be painful and immediate. We will not be in a hurry to repeat the process.
We get all hung up about the violence that the old discipline did to children, only to have them feed on a steady diet of the most graphic violence on their computer screens today and then have it spill over onto the streets in drunken weekend brawls when they get old enough to drink. What is wrong with that picture?
You know it was not just a religious law but civil law. It had to govern a new society. It's important to keep in mind it was very much a bronze age society and the people expected things to be the way they had always been. The fact is that God wasn't trying to start some kind of social justice revolution to overthrow all of bronze age society. He was establishing a way for people to come to more knowledge of the true spirituality. In Matthew 19:8 where Jesus says that because of the hardness of their hearts Moses gave them the commandment about divorces. There is reason for us to believe that laws about slavery were also given because of the hardness of their hearts at the time.
Times and attitudes change.....it was the ancient way to have servants. It gave the servants a job and put food in their bellies and gave them somewhere to live. There was no social security back then. Poverty was not preferable to slavery. If they failed to do the job that their master assigned to them, they knew what the consequences were.....
....a good incentive to be a diligent worker.
I can't say that I have ever owned a slave or treated one badly with a beating recently.....so what on earth are you going on about? I don't think God needs your permission to do whatever he sees fit.....any more than a boss needs the permission of his employees to tell him how to run his business. Try it and see where it gets you...
You're coming across as close minded. Have you read the Iliad? You can see how people thought in the bronze age. They likely just wouldn't understand if you told them it was wrong to enslave war captives. People didn't think the same as we do now. Think of different cultures. Think of how one thing can be taboo in one culture and completely accepted in another.
So, wait a minute here. This sounds rather absurd. First of all, people who don't believe in God(s) couldn't possibly wish to remove him/them from their 'rightful position as Creator" because they don't believe God(s) exist in the first place and therefore wouldn't hold any position anywhere.
Oh I get it. You're against science when you feel it conflicts with your personal beliefs about God.